1932

Abstract

The cost of drugs is a major and rapidly rising component of health-care expenditures. We survey recent literature on the ethics and economics of skyrocketing pharmaceutical prices and find that advances in economic research have increased the sharpness and focus of the ethically based calls to increase access by modifying patent protection and reducing prices. In some cases, research supports ethical arguments for broader access. Other research suggests that efforts to broaden access result in unintended consequences for innovation and the medical needs of patients. Both ethicists and economists need to be more cognizant of the real clinical settings in which physicians practice medicine with real patients. Greater cross-disciplinary interaction among economists, ethicists, and physicians can help reduce the disjunction between innovation and access and improve access and patient care. This dialogue will impact private industry and may spur new multistakeholder paradigms for drug discovery, development, and pricing.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-pharmtox-010814-124649
2015-01-06
2024-06-19
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/pharmtox/55/1/annurev-pharmtox-010814-124649.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-pharmtox-010814-124649&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

Literature Cited

  1. Santoro MA. 1.  2005. Human rights and human needs: diverse moral principles justifying third world access to affordable HIV/AIDS drugs. N.C. J. Int. Law Commer. Regul. 31:923–42 [Google Scholar]
  2. Arrow KJ. 2.  1963. Uncertainty and the welfare economics of medical care. Am. Econ. Rev. 53:941–73 [Google Scholar]
  3. Spinello RA. 3.  1992. Ethics, pricing and the pharmaceutical industry. J. Bus. Ethics 11:617–26 [Google Scholar]
  4. 4. Natl. Cent. Health Stat 2012. Health, United States, 2011: with special feature on socioeconomic status and health. Rep., Natl. Cent. Health Stat., Hyattsville, MD. http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/hus/hus11.pdf [Google Scholar]
  5. De George RT. 5.  2005. Intellectual property and pharmaceutical drugs: an ethical analysis. Bus. Ethics Q. 15:549–75 [Google Scholar]
  6. Getzen TE. 6.  2000. Health care is an individual necessity and a national luxury: applying multilevel decision models to the analysis of health care expenditures. J. Health Econ. 19:259–70 [Google Scholar]
  7. Bobinac A, van Exel J, Rutten FFH, Brouwer WBF. 7.  2014. The value of a QALY: individual willingness to pay for health gains under risk. PharmacoEconomics 32:75–86 [Google Scholar]
  8. 8. US Census Bur 2014. State & Country QuickFacts: USA US Cens. Bur., Washington, DC. http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/00000.html [Google Scholar]
  9. Kazerooni R, Bounthavong M, Watanabe JH. 9.  2013. Association of copayment and statin adherence stratified by socioeconomic status. Ann. Pharmacother. 47:1463–70 [Google Scholar]
  10. Blaschke TF, Osterberg L, Vrijens B, Urquhart J. 10.  2012. Adherence to medications: insights arising from studies on the unreliable link between prescribed and actual drug dosing histories. Annu. Rev. Pharmacol. Toxicol. 52:275–301 [Google Scholar]
  11. Eaddy MT, Cook CL, O'Day K, Burch SP, Cantrell CR. 11.  2012. How patient cost-sharing trends affect adherence and outcomes. Pharm. Ther. 37:45–55 [Google Scholar]
  12. Maciejewski ML, Farley JF, Parker J, Wansink D. 12.  2010. Copayment reductions generate greater medication adherence in targeted patients. Health Aff. 29:2002–8 [Google Scholar]
  13. Roebuck MC, Liberman JN, Gemmill-Toyama M, Brennan TA. 13.  2011. Medication adherence leads to lower health care use and costs despite increased drug spending. Health Aff. 30:91–99 [Google Scholar]
  14. 14. Kaiser Fam. Found 2008. USA Today/Kaiser Family Foundation/Harvard School of Public Health: the public on prescription drugs and pharmaceutical companies Rep. 7748, Henry J. Kaiser Fam. Found., Menlo Park, CA. http://kaiserfamilyfoundation.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/7748.pdf [Google Scholar]
  15. 15. Consum. Rep 2012. Sluggish economy forces Americans to cut corners to pay for medications. Consumer Reports Sept. http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/2012/09/sluggish-economy-forces-americans-to-cut-corners-to-pay-for-medications/index.htm [Google Scholar]
  16. Selgelid MJ. 16.  2008. A full-pull program for the provision of pharmaceuticals: practical issues. Public Health Ethics 1:134–45 [Google Scholar]
  17. 17. United Nations 2013. Goal 8: develop a global partnership for development Millennium Development Goals and Beyond 2015, United Nations, New York, accessed June 27, 2014. http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/global.shtml [Google Scholar]
  18. Werhane PH, Gorman M. 18.  2005. Intellectual property rights, moral imagination, and access to life-enhancing drugs. Bus. Ethics Q. 15:595–613 [Google Scholar]
  19. Sonderholm J. 19.  2009. Paying a high price for low costs: why there should be no legal constraints on the profits that can be made on drugs for tropical diseases. J. Med. Ethics 35:315–19 [Google Scholar]
  20. Maitland I. 20.  2002. Priceless goods: How should life-saving drugs be priced?. Bus. Ethics Q. 12:451–80 [Google Scholar]
  21. Seelos C, Mair J. 21.  2005. Social entrepreneurship: creating new business models to serve the poor. Bus. Horiz. 48:241–46 [Google Scholar]
  22. Sonderholm J. 22.  2010. Ethical issues surrounding intellectual property rights. Philos. Compass 5:1107–15 [Google Scholar]
  23. Kuhn R, Beall RF. 23.  2012. The time for pharmaceutical compulsory licensing has expired. Nat. Med. 18:1168 [Google Scholar]
  24. Barton JH. 24.  2004. TRIPS and the global pharmaceutical market. Health Aff. 23:146–54 [Google Scholar]
  25. Chittoor R, Ray S. 25.  2007. Internationalization paths of Indian pharmaceutical firms—a strategic group analysis. J. Int. Manag. 13:338–55 [Google Scholar]
  26. Schut FT, van Bergeijk PAG. 26.  1986. International price discrimination: the pharmaceutical industry. World Dev. 14:1141–50 [Google Scholar]
  27. Danzon PM, Towse A. 27.  2003. Differential pricing for pharmaceuticals: reconciling access, R&D and patents. Int. J. Health Care Financ. Econ. 3:183–205 [Google Scholar]
  28. Lazzarini Z. 28.  2003. Making access to pharmaceuticals a reality: legal options under TRIPS and the case of Brazil. Yale Hum. Rights Dev. Law J. 6:103–38 [Google Scholar]
  29. Ramsey FP. 29.  1927. A contribution to the theory of taxation. Econ. J. 37:47–61 [Google Scholar]
  30. Balotsky ER. 30.  2009. Where strategy and ethics converge: pharmaceutical industry pricing policy for Medicare Part D beneficiaries. J. Bus. Ethics 84:75–88 [Google Scholar]
  31. Darbà J, Rovira PJ. 31.  1998. Parallel imports of pharmaceuticals in the European Union. PharmacoEconomics 14:129–36 [Google Scholar]
  32. Malueg DA, Schwartz M. 32.  1994. Parallel imports, demand dispersion, and international price discrimination. J. Int. Econ. 37:167–95 [Google Scholar]
  33. Morel CM, McGuire A, Mossialos E. 33.  2011. The level of income appears to have no consistent bearing on pharmaceutical prices across countries. Health Aff. 30:1545–52 [Google Scholar]
  34. Ingram J. 34.  2011. Eliminating innovation. J. Legal Med. 32:115–28 [Google Scholar]
  35. Verdecchia A, Francisci S, Brenner H, Gatta G, Micheli A. 35.  et al. 2007. Recent cancer survival in Europe: a 2000–02 period analysis of EUROCARE-4 data. Lancet Oncol. 8:784–96 [Google Scholar]
  36. Neppl-Huber C, Zappa M, Coebergh JW, Rapiti E, Rachtan J. 36.  et al. 2012. Changes in incidence, survival and mortality of prostate cancer in Europe and the United States in the PSA era: additional diagnoses and avoided deaths. Ann. Oncol. 23:1325–34 [Google Scholar]
  37. Mason A, Drummond M, Ramsey S, Campbell J, Raisch D. 37.  2010. Comparison of anticancer drug coverage decisions in the United States and United Kingdom: Does the evidence support the rhetoric?. J. Clin. Oncol. 28:3234–38 [Google Scholar]
  38. Galizzi MM, Ghislandi S, Miraldo M. 38.  2011. Effects of reference pricing in pharmaceutical markets. PharmacoEconomics 29:17–33 [Google Scholar]
  39. Morgan S, Cunningham C. 39.  2008. The effect of evidence-based drug coverage policies on pharmaceutical R&D: a case study from British Columbia. Healthc. Policy 3:54–63 [Google Scholar]
  40. López-Casasnovas G, Puig-Junoy J. 40.  2000. Review of the literature on reference pricing. Health Policy 54:87–123 [Google Scholar]
  41. Brekke KR, Holmås TH, Straume OR. 41.  2011. Reference pricing, competition, and pharmaceutical expenditures: theory and evidence from a natural experiment. J. Public Econ. 95:624–38 [Google Scholar]
  42. Bardey D, Bommier A, Jullien B. 42.  2010. Retail price regulation and innovation: reference pricing in the pharmaceutical industry. J. Health Econ. 29:303–16 [Google Scholar]
  43. Ghislandi S. 43.  2011. Competition and the Reference Pricing Scheme for pharmaceuticals. J. Health Econ. 30:1137–49 [Google Scholar]
  44. Gatesman ML, Smith TJ. 44.  2011. The shortage of essential chemotherapy drugs in the United States. N. Engl. J. Med. 365:1653–55 [Google Scholar]
  45. Miller DW. 45.  2012. Value-based pricing. Pharm. Med. 26:217–22 [Google Scholar]
  46. Towse A. 46.  2010. Value based pricing, research and development, and patient access schemes. Will the United Kingdom get it right or wrong?. Br. J. Clin. Pharmacol. 70:360–66 [Google Scholar]
  47. Cressey D. 47.  2013. UK backs away from ‘value-based pricing’ for drugs. Nature News Blog, Nov. 6. http://blogs.nature.com/news/2013/11/uk-backs-away-from-value-based-pricing-for-drugs.html
  48. Scott Morton F, Seabright P. 48.  2013. Research into biomarkers: How does drug procurement affect the design of clinical trials?. Health Manag. Policy Innov. 1:1–15 [Google Scholar]
  49. Hoffman S. 49.  2012. The drugs stop here: a public health framework to address the drug shortage crisis. Food Drug Law J. 1:1–22 [Google Scholar]
  50. Chabner BA. 50.  2011. Drug shortages—a critical challenge for the generic-drug market. N. Engl. J. Med. 365:2147–49 [Google Scholar]
  51. Cherici C, McGinnis P, Russell W. 51.  2011. Buyer beware: drug shortages and the gray market. Premier Healthcare Alliance Aug. http://www.chcablog.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/Gray-Market-Analysis-David-Edit.pdf [Google Scholar]
  52. Danzon PM, Mulcahy AW, Towse AK. 52.  2011. Pharmaceutical pricing in emerging markets: effects of income, competition and procurement. Work. Pap. 17174, Natl. Bur. Econ. Res., Cambridge, Mass. [Google Scholar]
  53. Bekkers E, Francois J, Manchin M. 53.  2012. Import prices, income, and inequality. Eur. Econ. Rev. 56:848–69 [Google Scholar]
  54. Felder TM, Palmer NR, Lal LS, Mullen PD. 54.  2011. What is the evidence for pharmaceutical patient assistance programs? A systematic review. J. Health Care Poor Underserved 22:24–49 [Google Scholar]
  55. Chisholm MA, DiPiro JT. 55.  2002. Pharmaceutical manufacturer assistance programs. Arch. Intern. Med. 162:780–84 [Google Scholar]
  56. Choudhry NK, Lee JL, Agnew-Blais J, Corcoran C, Shrank WH. 56.  2009. Drug company–sponsored patient assistance programs: a viable safety net?. Health Aff. 28:827–34 [Google Scholar]
  57. Duke KS, Raube K, Lipton HL. 57.  2005. Patient-assistance programs: assessment of and use by safety-net clinics. Am. J. Health Syst. Pharm. 62:726–31 [Google Scholar]
  58. Chauncey D, Mullins CD, Tran BV, McNally D, McEwan RN. 58.  2006. Medication access through patient assistance programs. Am. J. Health-Syst. Pharm. 63:1254–59 [Google Scholar]
  59. Greene JA, Kesselheim AS. 59.  2010. Pharmaceutical marketing and the new social media. N. Engl. J. Med. 363:2087–89 [Google Scholar]
  60. 60. Pew Charit. Trust 2013. Persuading the prescribers: pharmaceutical industry marketing and its influence on physicians and patients. http://www.pewhealth.org/other-resource/persuading-the-prescribers-pharmaceutical-industry-marketing-and-its-influence-on-physicians-and-patients-85899439814
  61. Arnold DG, Oakley JL. 61.  2013. The politics and strategy of industry self-regulation: the pharmaceutical industry's principles for ethical direct-to-consumer advertising as a deceptive blocking strategy. J. Health Polit. Policy Law 38:505–44 [Google Scholar]
  62. Rosenthal MB, Donohue JM. 62.  2006. Direct-to-consumer advertising of prescription drugs: a policy dilemma. Ethics and the Pharmaceutical Industry M Santoro, TM Gorrie 169–83 Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  63. Hoffman JR, Wilkes M. 63.  1999. Direct to consumer advertising of prescription drugs. BMJ 318:1301–2 [Google Scholar]
  64. Capella ML, Taylor CR, Campbell RC, Longwell LS. 64.  2009. Do pharmaceutical marketing activities raise prices? Evidence from five major therapeutic classes. J. Public Policy Mark. 28:146–61 [Google Scholar]
  65. Ellison SF, Snyder CM. 65.  2010. Countervailing power in wholesale pharmaceuticals. J. Ind. Econ. 58:32–53 [Google Scholar]
  66. Duggan M, Scott Morton F. 66.  2010. The effect of Medicare Part D on pharmaceutical prices and utilization. Am. Econ. Rev. 100:590–607 [Google Scholar]
  67. Duggan MG, Scott Morton F. 67.  2011. The medium-term impact of Medicare Part D on pharmaceutical prices. Am. Econ. Rev. 101:387–92 [Google Scholar]
  68. Duggan M, Scott Morton FM. 68.  2006. The distortionary effects of government procurement: evidence from Medicaid prescription drug purchasing. Q. J. Econ. 121:1–30 [Google Scholar]
  69. Berndt ER, Newhouse JP. 69.  2010. Pricing and reimbursement in U.S. pharmaceutical markets. Work. Pap. 16297, Natl. Bur. Econ. Res., Cambridge, Mass. [Google Scholar]
  70. Moore WJ, Newman RJ. 70.  1993. Drug formulary restrictions as a cost-containment policy in Medicaid programs. J. Law Econ. 36:71–97 [Google Scholar]
  71. Ketcham JD, Epstein AJ. 71.  2008. Medicaid preferred drug lists' costs to physicians. Med. Care 46:9–16 [Google Scholar]
  72. Auguste BG, Laboissière M, Mendonca LT. 72.  2009. How health care costs contribute to income disparity in the United States. McKinsey Q. Apr. http://www.mckinsey.com/insights/economic_studies/how_health_care_costs_contribute_to_income_disparity_in_the_united_states [Google Scholar]
  73. Melnikova I. 73.  2012. Rare diseases and orphan drugs. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 11:267–68 [Google Scholar]
  74. Hemphill TA. 74.  2010. Extraordinary pricing of orphan drugs: Is it a socially responsible strategy for the U.S. pharmaceutical industry?. J. Bus. Ethics 94:225–42 [Google Scholar]
  75. 75. Inst. Med 2011. Rare Diseases and Orphan Products: Accelerating Research and Development. Washington, DC: Natl. Acad. [Google Scholar]
  76. Bruyaka O, Zeitzmann HK, Chalamon I, Wokutch RE, Thakur P. 76.  2013. Strategic corporate social responsibility and orphan drug development: insights from the US and the EU biopharmaceutical industry. J. Bus. Ethics 117:45–65 [Google Scholar]
  77. Haffner ME, Torrent-Farnell J, Maher PD. 77.  2008. Does orphan drug legislation really answer the needs of patients?. Lancet 371:2041–44 [Google Scholar]
  78. Braun MM, Farag-El-Massah S, Kui X, Coté TR. 78.  2010. Emergence of orphan drugs in the United States: a quantitative assessment of the first 25 years. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 9:519–22 [Google Scholar]
  79. Wellman-Labadie O, Zhou Y. 79.  2010. The US Orphan Drug Act: rare disease research stimulator or commercial opportunity?. Health Policy 95:216–28 [Google Scholar]
  80. Yin W. 80.  2008. Market incentives and pharmaceutical innovation. J. Health Econ. 27:1060–77 [Google Scholar]
  81. Simoens S. 81.  2011. Pricing and reimbursement of orphan drugs: the need for more transparency. Orphanet J. Rare Dis. 6:42 [Google Scholar]
  82. Loughnot D. 82.  2005. Potential interactions of the Orphan Drug Act and pharmacogenomics: a flood of orphan drugs and abuses?. Am. J. Law Med. 31:365–80 [Google Scholar]
  83. Yin W. 83.  2009. R&D policy, agency costs and innovation in personalized medicine. J. Health Econ. 28:950–62 [Google Scholar]
  84. Gilbert R, Shapiro C. 84.  1990. Optimal patent length and breadth. RAND J. Econ. 21:106–12 [Google Scholar]
  85. Aghion P, Howitt P, Prantl S. 85.  2013. Patent rights, product market reforms, and innovation. Work. Pap. 18854, Natl. Bur. Econ. Res., Cambridge, Mass. [Google Scholar]
  86. Boldrin M, Levine DK. 86.  2008. Against Intellectual Monopoly New York: Cambridge Univ. Press [Google Scholar]
  87. Williams HL. 87.  2013. Intellectual property rights and innovation: evidence from the human genome. J. Polit. Econ. 121:1–27 [Google Scholar]
  88. Lerner J. 88.  2009. The empirical impact of intellectual property rights on innovation: puzzles and clues. Am. Econ. Rev. 99:343–48 [Google Scholar]
  89. Boldrin M, Levine DK. 89.  2013. The case against patents. J. Econ. Perspect. 27:3–22 [Google Scholar]
  90. Budish E, Roin BN, Williams H. 90.  2013. Do fixed patent terms distort innovation? Evidence from cancer clinical trials. Work. Pap. 19430, Natl. Bur. Econ. Res., Cambridge, Mass. [Google Scholar]
  91. Caves RE, Whinston MD, Hurwitz MA. 91.  1991. Patent expiration, entry, and competition in the U.S. pharmaceutical industry. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity: Microeconomics 1991 MN Baily, C Winston 1–66 Washington, DC: Brookings Inst. [Google Scholar]
  92. Wiggins SN, Maness R. 92.  1994. Price competition in pharmaceutical markets Work. Pap., Dep. Econ., Texas A&M Univ. [Google Scholar]
  93. Lu ZJ, Comanor WS. 93.  1998. Strategic pricing of new pharmaceuticals. Rev. Econ. Stat. 80:108–18 [Google Scholar]
  94. Frank RG, Salkever DS. 94.  1997. Generic entry and the pricing of pharmaceuticals. J. Econ. Manag. Strategy 6:75–90 [Google Scholar]
  95. Granlund D. 95.  2010. Price and welfare effects of a pharmaceutical substitution reform. J. Health Econ. 29:856–65 [Google Scholar]
  96. Aitken ML, Berndt ER, Bosworth B, Cockburn IM, Frank R. 96.  et al. 2013. The regulation of prescription drug competition and market responses: patterns in prices and sales following loss of exclusivity. Work. Pap. 19487, Natl. Bur. Econ. Res., Cambridge, Mass. [Google Scholar]
  97. Higgins M, Graham S. 97.  2009. Balancing innovation and access: patent challenges tip the scales. Science 326:370–71 [Google Scholar]
  98. Panattoni LE. 98.  2011. The effect of Paragraph IV decisions and generic entry before patent expiration on brand pharmaceutical firms. J. Health Econ. 30:126–45 [Google Scholar]
  99. Hemphill CS, Sampat BN. 99.  2012. Evergreening, patent challenges, and effective market life in pharmaceuticals. J. Health Econ. 31:327–39 [Google Scholar]
  100. Branstetter LG, Chatterjee C, Higgins M. 100.  2011. Regulation and welfare: evidence from Paragraph IV generic entry in the pharmaceutical industry. Work. Pap. 17188, Natl. Bur. Econ. Res., Cambridge, Mass. [Google Scholar]
  101. Aitken M, Berndt E. 101.  2011. Medicare Part D at age five: What has happened to seniors' prescription drug prices? Rep., IMS Inst. Healthc. Inform. http://www.imshealth.com/ims/Global/Content/Home%20Page%20Content/IMS%20News/IHII_Medicare_Part_D2.pdf [Google Scholar]
  102. Cameron A, Ewen M, Ross-Degnan D, Ball D, Laing R. 102.  2009. Medicine prices, availability, and affordability in 36 developing and middle-income countries: a secondary analysis. Lancet 373:240–49 [Google Scholar]
  103. Grootendorst P, Hollis A, Levine DK, Pogge T, Edwards AM. 103.  2011. New approaches to rewarding pharmaceutical innovation. Can. Med. Assoc. J. 183:681–85 [Google Scholar]
  104. Koski G, Wilder B, Olmsted A. 104.  2011. A global clinical research network: moving beyond harmonisation. Scrip Regulatory AffairsJuly 8 [Google Scholar]
  105. Kremer M, Williams H. 105.  2010. Incentivizing innovation: adding to the tool kit. Innov. Policy Econ. 10:1–17 [Google Scholar]
  106. Banerjee A, Hollis A, Pogge T. 106.  2010. The Health Impact Fund: incentives for improving access to medicines. Lancet 375:166–69 [Google Scholar]
  107. Ridley DB, Grabowski HG, Moe JL. 107.  2006. Developing drugs for developing countries. Health Aff. 25:313–24 [Google Scholar]
  108. Robertson AS, Stefanakis R, Joseph D, Moree M. 108.  2012. The impact of the US priority review voucher on private-sector investment in global health research and development. PLOS Negl. Trop. Dis. 6:e1750 [Google Scholar]
  109. Clemens J, Holmgren J, Kaufmann SHE, Mantovani A. 109.  2010. Ten years of the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization: challenges and progress. Nat. Immunol. 11:1069–72 [Google Scholar]
  110. Barder O, Kremer M, Williams H. 110.  2006. Advance market commitments: a policy to stimulate investment in vaccines for neglected diseases. Econ. Voice 3:1–6 [Google Scholar]
  111. Gilchrist SAN, Nanni A. 111.  2012. Lessons learned in shaping vaccine markets in low-income countries: a review of the vaccine market segment supported by the GAVI Alliance. Health Policy Plan. 28:838–46 [Google Scholar]
  112. Light DW. 112.  2011. Saving the pneumococcal AMC and GAVI. Hum. Vaccines 7:138–41 [Google Scholar]
  113. Cogdill B, Nappi JM. 113.  2012. Assessment of prescribers' knowledge of the cost of medications. Ann. Pharmacother. 46:200–7 [Google Scholar]
  114. Allan GM, Lexchin J, Wiebe N. 114.  2007. Physician awareness of drug cost: a systematic review. PLOS Med. 4:e283 [Google Scholar]
  115. Epstein AJ, Johnson SJ. 115.  2012. Physician response to financial incentives when choosing drugs to treat breast cancer. Int. J. Health Care Financ. Econ. 12:285–302 [Google Scholar]
  116. Brekke KR, Holmås TH, Straume OR. 116.  2013. Margins and market shares: pharmacy incentives for generic substitution. Eur. Econ. Rev. 61:116–31 [Google Scholar]
  117. Begley CE. 117.  1987. Prospective payment and medical ethics. J. Med. Philos. 12:107–22 [Google Scholar]
  118. Shortell SM, Waters TM, Clarke KB, Budetti PP. 118.  1998. Physicians as double agents: maintaining trust in an era of multiple accountabilities. JAMA 280:1102–8 [Google Scholar]
  119. 119. Kaiser Fam. Found 2013. 2013 employer health benefits survey. Rep. 8465, Henry J. Kaiser Fam. Found., Menlo Park, CA. http://kff.org/private-insurance/report/2013-employer-health-benefits/ [Google Scholar]
  120. Baicker K, Chandra A. 120.  2005. The labor market effects of rising health insurance premiums. Work. Pap. 11160, Natl. Bur. Econ. Res., Cambridge, Mass. [Google Scholar]
  121. Hellerstein JK. 121.  1998. The importance of the physician in the generic versus trade-name prescription decision. RAND J. Econ. 29:108–36 [Google Scholar]
  122. Mott DA, Cline RR. 122.  2002. Exploring generic drug use behavior: the role of prescribers and pharmacists in the opportunity for generic drug use and generic substitution. Med. Care 40:662–74 [Google Scholar]
  123. Gagnon M-A, Lexchin J. 123.  2008. The cost of pushing pills: a new estimate of pharmaceutical promotion expenditures in the United States. PLOS Med. 5:e1 [Google Scholar]
  124. Parker-Lue S. 124.  2014. The persuasive effect of external financial relationships: the influence of pharmaceutical industry payments on decision-making in hospitals. Rep. 2392547, Soc. Sci. Res. Netw., Rochester, NY [Google Scholar]
  125. Ziegler MG, Lew P, Singer BC. 125.  1995. The accuracy of drug information from pharmaceutical sales representatives. JAMA 273:1296–98 [Google Scholar]
  126. Spurling GK, Mansfield PR, Montgomery BD, Lexchin J, Doust J. 126.  et al. 2010. Information from pharmaceutical companies and the quality, quantity, and cost of physicians' prescribing: a systematic review. PLOS Med. 7:e1000352 [Google Scholar]
  127. Brook RH. 127.  2010. What if physicians actually had to control medical costs?. JAMA 304:1489–90 [Google Scholar]
  128. Reichert S, Simon T, Halm EA. 128.  2000. Physicians' attitudes about prescribing and knowledge of the costs of common medications. Arch. Intern. Med. 160:2799–803 [Google Scholar]
  129. Pavcnik N. 129.  2002. Do pharmaceutical prices respond to potential patient out-of-pocket expenses?. RAND J. Econ. 33:469–87 [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-pharmtox-010814-124649
Loading
  • Article Type: Review Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error